lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 10 Jan 2019 09:08:07 +0100
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Ian Kumlien <ian.kumlien@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:     Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] v4.20 - bridge not getting DHCP responses? (works in
 4.19.13)

On Thu, 2019-01-10 at 01:38 +0100, Ian Kumlien wrote:
> Confirmed, sending a new mail with summary etc
> 
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 1:16 AM Ian Kumlien <ian.kumlien@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 12:17 AM Ian Kumlien <ian.kumlien@...il.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2019, 00:09 Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com wrote:
> > 
> >  [--8<---]
> > 
> > > > > when looking at "git log v4.19...v4.20
> > > > > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/" nothing else really stands out...
> > > > > The machine is also running NAT for my home network and all of that
> > > > > works just fine...
> > > > > 
> > > > > I started with tcpdump, prooving that packets reached all the way
> > > > > outside but replies never made it, reboorting
> > > > > with 4.19.13 resulted in replies appearing in the tcpdump.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I don't quite know where to look - and what can i do to test - i tried
> > > > > disabling all offloading (due to the UDP
> > > > > offloading changes) but nothing helped...
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ideas? Patches? ;)
> > > > 
> > > > Running a bisection would certainly help find the offending commit if
> > > > that is something that you can do?
> > > 
> > > I was hoping for a likely suspect but this was on my "Todo" for Friday night anyway... (And I already started testing with some patches reversed)
> > 
> > So after lengthy git bisect sections, both from the latest stable i
> > was using (not the best of ideas)
> > and from 4.19.
> > 
> > The latest stable yielded 72b0094f918294e6cb8cf5c3b4520d928fbb1a57 -
> > which is incorrect...
> > 
> > However, the proper bisect gave me this:
> > fb420d5d91c1274d5966917725e71f27ed092a85 is the first bad commit
> > commit fb420d5d91c1274d5966917725e71f27ed092a85
> > Author: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> > Date:   Fri Sep 28 10:28:44 2018 -0700
> > 
> >     tcp/fq: move back to CLOCK_MONOTONIC

Thank you for bisecting. 

Should be solve by:

https://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=154696956604748&w=2

Can you test with the above applied?

Thanks,

Paolo

Powered by blists - more mailing lists